2. Mater. Colect. [42-59] - Câmara Municipal do Porto

Summary tableMSUQL. COLLECTIVE MATERIAL CONDITIONS.CULTURAL FACILITIESINDICATORS UNITS LAST VALUE/YEAR TENDENCY / PERIOD QQL SITUATIONPublic libraries per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.42 2000 1995/2000 Art galleries per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.15 2001 1991/2001 Museums per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.10 2001 1991/2001 SPORTS FACILITIESPavilions per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.13 2000 – – ☹Swimming pools per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.19 2000 – – ☹Other sports facilities per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 1.78 2000 – – EDUCATIONAL FACILITIESPrimary and secondary schools per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.86 2000 – – ☺Computers in primary and secondary schools no./100 students 7 2002/2003 – – ☹per 100 studentsSOCIAL AND HEALTH FACILITIESKindergartens per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 39 2001 1995/2001 ☺Day nurseries per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 11 2001 1995/2001 Homes for the elderly, day centres no./1,000 inhab 21 2001 1995/2001 ☹and domiciliary services per 1,000 inhabitantsHospital beds per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 16.1 1998 1995/1998 ☹Health care centres and annexes per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 0.09 1999 1995/1998 ☹Doctors per 1,000 inhabitants – – – – – –HERITAGEProperty of national and public interest no. 72 2000 1991/2000 ☺Qualified public space – – – – – –MOBILITYAverage speed of individual transport km/ph 17.9 July 2003 – – ☹Average speed of public transport km/ph 12.9 May 2003 – – ☹Parking places in car parks no. 10,624 2002 2001/2002 ☺TRADE AND SERVICESRetail shops per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 10.5 1999 – – ☺Support services to the population per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 3.7 1999 – – ☺Hotels and restaurants per 1,000 inhabitants no./1,000 inhab 2.4 1999 – – ☺Evolutionary tendency of the indicator::Growth with a positive impact on the QOLReduction with a positive impact on the QOLStabilityGrowth with a negative impact on the QOLReduction with a negative impact on the QOLEvaluation of the present situation in termsof Quality of Life:☺ Good Reasonable☹ Bad49